What is the best part of an RPG; beginning, middle, or end?

[CryptRat]

Generally the beginning treats you like a moron

That's wrong, just play good games. Why do you think many players feel overwhelmed by the beginning of those games? If the beginning treats you like a moron then the rest of the game probably does too.

 

[Sigourn]

That's wrong, just play good games.

And in those good games, the middle part is generally better, hence my entire post and not just the part you chose to quote.

If the beginning treats you like the moron then the rest of the game probably does too.

All games I know tend to considerably ease on the handholding once you are past the beginning. Even if they remain handholdy, the middle is still the best part.

 

[V_K]

If the beginning treats you like the moron then the rest of the game probably does too.

There are some fun exceptions though. Knightmare's difficulty progresses from "puzzles" that explicitly tell you to press that button nearby to, well, (k)nightmarish.

 

[Sigourn]

I should add I can't think of an RPG where your characters pretty much reach their max skills with plenty of game to be played. In other words, you can't really test your full strength. Hence, the "end" tends to be pretty abrupt.

Generally a movie has 20 minutes or so to begin, then another 80 minutes that consist of "the middle", and 20 minutes that start to iron out the ending before it ends. In RPGs, it truly feels as if you play for 50 hours of "middle", and then the game is over in "2 hours", whereas a more proper "end" progression would last around 12 hours if we go by movies.

 

[Zibniyat]

Depends on the quality of the game I guess.

Skyrim (lel, am I allowed to call it an RPG?) was fairly interesting in the beginning, since I like to indulge myself in just appreciating the aesthetics of a game, but after 30 h it became a drag, barely finished the main quest, didn't finish a bunch of other major quest-lines, and overall I could say that the beginning was the "best" simply because I didn't know that the entire game will be pretty much boring copy/paste shit later on.

Compared to for example one KOTOR 2 (non-"restored" content), where the beginning was quite a drag (Peragus meh), the middle was very good and I thoroughly appreciated the end which left a strong impression on me.

I guess if the game simply copy/pastes its shit all over the place, it'll get boring sooner or later, so the beginning will always seem "better". Whilst games that have some twists, completely new mechanics and shit could become better later on.

 

[octavius]

I should add I can't think of an RPG where your characters pretty much reach their max skills with plenty of game to be played.

The Magic Candle.
Definitely dragged on too long, when your characters were maxed out, and with no loot from monsters the combat of the last 1/4 was a real chore.

 

[MilesBeyond]

I'm generally not a huge fan of endgame, for two reasons:

1. Difficulty. Offhand I can't think of a single RPG that remains a challenge by the end game. The items, skills and abilities you've been able to collect over the course of the game often makes even bonus bosses pretty easy, and the main boss is trivial. Every exception that's coming to mind is the product of mods. Actually I think Daggerfall was pretty difficult towards the end but I may just have had a shit build.

2. Resolution. There aren't a lot of RPGs that can land their plot in a satisfying way. Either there wasn't enough build-up, resulting in the final boss feeling like just another fight, or there was too much build-up, and the endgame plot twists and revelations are a bit of a let down (I'm looking at you, Pillars).


I don't know what to vote, though, because beginning and middle aren't all that well defined. Take BG2, for example. What qualifies as the beginning? Chateau Irenicus? Chapters 1 and 2? Chapters 1-3? I mean, a reasonable division seems Chs 1-2 as beginning, 3-5 as mid, 6-7 as ending. And here it seems to be that the beginning is definitely the strongest part. But if we define (as some people seem to be doing) beginning as the starter area, then the middle is definitely the best part.

 

[V_K]

I should add I can't think of an RPG where your characters pretty much reach their max skills with plenty of game to be played. In other words, you can't really test your full strength. Hence, the "end" tends to be pretty abrupt.

In any game with a level cap, you'll reach that cap way before the ending (unless you just rush the main quest).
My experience has been exactly the opposite - most games don't have mechanics to carry them all the way through, they start going stale at about 2/3 of the way.

 

[Zombra]

Middle.

I don't know how an RPG works at the beginning. Often I have to remake my whole party 2 or 3 times just to get the game to do what I want. Once I get the hang of it, there is nothing better than an RPG that responds to my build decisions how I expect it to. I take pleasure in going from student of the systems to mastering them and getting all the cool abilities. The ending may be a wonderful final exam, but often as not it's just more of the same with more hit points - either that or it's something totally arbitrary that has nothing to do with what I spent 60 hours learning (I'm looking at you, Risen). Anyway, by the end I've already stretched my character or party to its limits and done all the cool stuff I can do. By that time I'm ready to get it over with and move on to the next game.

 

[Valky]

To me the beginning is often the best. Scavenging for anything of value, equipping first things you find no matter how shitty they are, getting your first decent piece of equipment feels like finding the Holy Grail, running away from tough enemies and later getting that feeling of satisfaction when overcoming them, world is still a unknown place filled with mysteries where you dont know what dangers waits you around the corner.

You have just described item scarcity. When items and resources are scarce, everything has so much more value. I'm not sure why very few games keep this going throughout the game. It can add a lot to setting and feels.

Item scarcity combined with the unknown of playing an rpg for the first time really lends itself to an excellent feeling in general. I really liked Legend of Grimrock for this, where every new thing was exciting and I would gradually hand-me-down with equipment as I found better things.

 

[Great Deceiver]

I usually like the beginning of RPGs much more because resource management matters and the economy isn't completely broken at the start either. I hate ability bloat and having infinite money.

Edit: the only exceptions I can think of are the best Wizardries (where tension never really goes away, the abstract nature of the game helps with this I think) and King's Field 4 where the design of the map really comes together and you realize everything's connected in a pretty clever way.

 

[mondblut]

Beginning is fucking boring. Swinging a rusty knife against giant rats is one sure way to kill the game.

End tends to have massive hp bloat on enemies and all the good toys being arbitrarily taken away because muh challenge. Like, "lol, all your magic weapons disappear, also boss has total spell immunity and fully regenerates every turn, ain't we genius designers, huh". So, late midgame for me. You already use all the cool stuff and steamroll everything, while cool stuff-disablers and shit specifically made to disrupt your steamrolling is not yet in.

 

[Ash]

Beginning or middle, depending on the game. Rarely if ever the end. All for reasons already described.

 

[SCO]

Middle definitely. The start is nearly always milquetoast and full of 'oh you haven't this ability yet? I'm not going to program/design that in in then; here let me hold you hand in a unskippable tutorial / main quest funnel instead, which our focus testing assures us is fundamental' trollface from the designers. Especially annoying on replays.

 

[Ebonsword]

Some games save the best to the end.

Can you name a few? I can only think of Dragonfall.

Many of the Gold Box games, especially Gateway to the Savage Frontier.

Also, Dragon's Dogma (assuming you consider Bitterblack Isle as part of "the end").

 

[typical user]

That depends on what players want. I think I value RPGs that remain constant in quality, if you make cuts here and there then your game is probably a cash-grab.

 

[Severian Silk]

Skyrim (lel, am I allowed to call it an RPG?) was fairly interesting in the beginning, since I like to indulge myself in just appreciating the aesthetics of a game, but after 30 h it became a drag, barely finished the main quest, didn't finish a bunch of other major quest-lines, and overall I could say that the beginning was the "best" simply because I didn't know that the entire game will be pretty much boring copy/paste shit later on.

I had the same experience with Morrowind. Had fun in the beginning; killed the main baddie by accident; didn't bother finishing after that.

 

[eggdogg]

Depends on the game. I can play the first part of Wizardry 8 over and over. If played without mods, the middle of KOTOR2 is super fun; building a light saber and getting a prestige class all happen around the same time you get all your necessary feats and powers causing your character to take massive leaps forward...you can start to turn party members into jedi around that time which makes your party take a massive leap forward as well.

 

[*-*/\--/\~]

I prefer the late beginning and early midgame, as it tends to be the part where you do much of the exporing and discovery available in the game. Later, you have everything figured out and much of the fun disappears. Earlier, you kill rats in the basement with a stick, so possibilities are limited.

 

[Charles Eli Cheese]

For most of them the only good part is posting about how much it sucks on the rpg codex.

 

[eXalted]

The beginning - when everything that the game will throw at you is still in your head. An hour before the big realization and disappointment.